Page 2 of 2
Re: nuff said - agree to disagree
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 9:47 pm
by pylum2
nikgaukroger wrote:rbodleyscott wrote:switze01 wrote:because i have irish ancestors
Doesn't everyone?
Only the Americans seem to think this, oh, and the Irish
Mostly because its true.
Re: Book
Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:22 pm
by khurasan_miniatures
switze01 wrote:Yup got that one
Trouble is the irish confederates had a zero success
rate against everyone
Not counting Benburb, I guess, which was the largest battle of the Irish Confederate Wars?
Re: Book
Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:28 pm
by david53
khurasan_miniatures wrote:switze01 wrote:Yup got that one
Trouble is the irish confederates had a zero success
rate against everyone
Not counting Benburb, I guess, which was the largest battle of the Irish Confederate Wars?
Guess that would be historical since against the NMA they did lose most times IIRC the scots beat them up north as well could be wrong there.
Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:47 pm
by khurasan_miniatures
The biggest problems for the Confederates were the lack of good cavalry and most especially the lack of good leadership.
Most of the disasters were due to incompetent deployment by the ranking commander. Some of the deployments for battle were real forehead slappers.
However, even when competently led, the lack of sufficient numbers of cavalry proved decisive, as at Knocknaclashy, the last major battle of the Confederate Wars (against the New Model Army). There the outnumbered and lightly equipped Irish Horse were scattered and the Irish foot, which fought quite bravely and on equal terms with the New Model infantry, were outflanked as a result.
The one time that the Confederates were led competently,
and were not outflanked due to their cavalry being scattered, was at Benburb.
http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/mil ... enburb.htm